100 SOCIAL SCIENTIST of a famous photograph, based on an original lithograph, of the freedom fighter Chandrasekhar Azad shows. In the most standard representation of him, Azad is shown with the sacred thread of an upper-caste Hindu across his bare chest, twirling his moustache and sporting a large wristwatch. In calendar images, Azad, who was killed in an encounter with the police, is often shown with Bhagat Singh, who was sent to the gallows and is revered as a martyr to the cause of Indian independence. Azad was a Hindu, Bhagat Singh a Sikh, and Britons conditioned by "anthropometric obsessions" would have expected a "fundamental difference" between them, "a separation that could be testified by sartorial, physiognomic and physiological incompatibility." Yet, in popular representations, largely the work of a Muslim artist, H.R. Raja, Azad and Bhagat Singh appear identical, distinguished "only by the presence of a hat [on Bhagat Singh] or a wristwatch and sacred thread". This image, Pinney argues, "suggests an oppositional practice, a political critique of the divisiveness of British policy and much of its imperial science" (p. 209). Enticing as is Pinney's discussion of Nagda portraiture, he stops short on occasion of asking fundamental questions about the cultural politics of representation. Among the many photographic practices that Pinney encountered in Nagda, the use of multiple framing is striking. The cover of the book depicts a man, Ramlal, holding a framed photograph; within that frame, his brother, Hira, who was killed by a train, is shown holding another framed photograph of their father, Ganpat. Pinney has nothing to say about the possible indigenous inflections of this representational practice. Might it have something to do, for instance, with the common Indian narrative strategy, encountered in the Panchatantra, the Puranas, and the Mahabharata, of the story within the story within the story? Similarly, Pinney does not allow the multiple, simultaneous notions of time which are the bedrock of the Puranas to inform his discussion of temporality. Far more than most social historians, Pinney allows that Indian categories have something vital to tell us about photography, but his discussion of bhav (emotion or sentiment) is quite inadequate. The marvelous photograph of members of the family of one Ragu Ravidas in front of a "heavily coiffured Shiv" taken in a traveling studio in Nagda attests to Pinney's richly nuanced understanding of how divinities enter into (and exit from) photographs, but he does not push his query far enough to ask: what do photographs do to Indian gods/goddesses? do they give birth to them and allow others to die? But that Pinney's book even encourages us to frame questions